Date of Decision: October 5, 2020
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Karate Athlete and Trainer
Field: Martial Arts
Nationality: [Not Specified]
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Participation as a Judge: The Petitioner submitted evidence, including certificates and letters, establishing his participation as a judge at karate tournaments, meeting the criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iv).
Criteria Not Met:
Lesser Nationally or Internationally Recognized Prizes or Awards: The Petitioner’s evidence of awards from various tournaments, including the “Panamerican National,” did not establish national or international recognition, and there were inconsistencies in the documentation provided, failing to meet the criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i).
Published Material: The evidence provided did not meet the criterion for published material about the Petitioner in professional, major trade, or other major media, failing to meet the criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iii).
Leading or Critical Role: The Petitioner’s roles as an athlete and instructor were not sufficiently documented to demonstrate leading or critical roles in organizations with distinguished reputations, failing to meet the criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(viii).
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
The evidence did not establish that the Petitioner’s awards were nationally or internationally recognized, and there were inconsistencies in the documentation provided.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
The materials submitted did not qualify as professional or major media, and therefore did not meet the criterion.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
Not applicable.
Participation as a Judge:
The Petitioner participated as a judge at several karate tournaments, meeting this criterion.
Membership in Associations:
Not applicable.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
Not applicable.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
The Petitioner’s roles were not sufficiently documented to demonstrate leading or critical roles in organizations with distinguished reputations.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Not applicable.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
Not applicable.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Not applicable.
Supporting Documentation
The Petitioner provided various supporting documents, including certificates, reference letters, and evidence of participation as a judge. However, these did not collectively establish the required criteria for extraordinary ability.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The motion to reopen was dismissed.
Reasoning: The evidence provided did not demonstrate that the Petitioner met the required evidentiary criteria for extraordinary ability. The Petitioner did not show that his awards were nationally or internationally recognized, nor did he provide sufficient evidence of leading or critical roles in distinguished organizations.
Next Steps: The Petitioner may consider submitting additional evidence that clearly establishes the major significance of their contributions or explore other immigration options that may better fit their qualifications.
